Report

it absolutely has to be. Grant's if I recall was in the $800K range...and I literally can't think of any other coach save JJ who has ever been hired away from us. we fire our coaches, thank you

I get this logic, but disagree with it for a handful of reasons. 1. I don't believe what we've seen the last two seasons is fully indicative of what we will see in perpetuity moving forward...I think we've seen two unique situations...one being a bunch of seniors transferring up for their last year of eligibility (hard to say they made the wrong choice with all 4 key parts making the Dance) and two, this year, a coaching change which will usually precipitate an exodus. 2. I think building a roster of 13 upperclassmen transfers all expecting play is a recipe for locker-room unrest when invariably a coach will land on an 8-9 man rotation. Vice and Mason and Howell were awesome, engaged cheerleaders all season...and I gotta assume that enthusiasm also carries over into practice. I doubt you get that kind of buy-in from a senior transfer if he ends up glued to the bench 3. we may literally not be able to afford a roster of 13 upperclassmen transfers. 4. as top programs basically build their rosters with transfers and top 50ish high school recruits, I think the level of incoming freshmen potentially available to us will go up. 3-4 star dudes who would sign with a Big 12 team to "develop" may want an opportunity to play now (and it seems from his CSU record, Robinson is more willing to play freshman than Hodge appeared to be) 5. mostly, we're only a few years into this new landscape and I do think there will soon be a normalization back toward keeping players for at least 2-3 seasons. development isn't dead...and given #4, I think we're in a position to benefit. we'll see what plays out

I see where you're going with this, but I think what we're all saying is that (A) recruiting grades rarely translate into on-field talent in college athletics; and (B) this is probably more of an error in ranking and evaluation than an under-the-radar diamond in the rough. To be clear, I hope with all hope that you're right, and all of us skeptics are proven very wrong. But that's how we see it at the moment.

I assume ours will be similar Revenue-sharing formula: Many schools are preparing to mirror the back-payment formula in their revenue-sharing model for the future. That means roughly 75% of future revenue will be shared with football players, 15% to men's basketball, 5% to women's basketball and 5% to all remaining sports. Those numbers will differ from school to school, but most power programs have shared similar models with administrators.

House v. NCAA settlement terms$2.77 billion in back payments to as many as 390,000 athletes who played an NCAA sport between 2016 and 2024. NIL deals must meet "fair market value." How that fair-market value is determined is the subject of intense debate. The long-expected approval of a landmark antitrust case allowing college players to be paid directly by schools is on hold for at least one week. The federal judge presiding over the House v. NCAA case requested attorneys make additional tweaks to the settlement's terms regarding roster limits and whether future players should be tied to the current class in the multi-billion dollar lawsuit. A final approval could come upon receipt of those tweaks from attorneys, though that might not happen for several weeks. "Basically, I think it's a good settlement," said Judge Claudia Wilken of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. "Don't quote me. I think it's worth pursuing and I think some of these things can be fixed if people tried to fix them." The House settlement would allow schools to directly pay players millions of dollars starting July 1. Each school's revenue-sharing formula would be capped at $20.5 million, with the pool increasing 4% each year during the 10-year agreement. The $2.8 billion in back payments for athletes who competed between 2016 and 2024 would also be set in motion upon Wilken's approval. read more: https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/house-v-ncaa-settlement-approval-awaits-in-landmark-case-as-judge-digs-in-on-roster-limits/amp/